806
Starfield players pirate the DLSS mod after the developer locks it behind paywall
(www.gamescensor.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2023
806 points (97.3% liked)
Games
32463 readers
1217 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The author wasn't selling DLSS, they were selling a shim to make it work with Starfield. That does require original work.
Knowing how to do the work is most of the value here. Yes, it's easy for those of us with the knowhow, but most people do not have that.
Think of an artist who can whip up a cool drawing in about 10 minutes. It was "easy" in the moment, but only because they spent years learning and practicing the skills to make it so. You aren't entitled to that artists labor for free just because it only took them a few minutes.
Sit your average gamer down with a copy of Starfield and
nvngx_dlss.dlland they won't be able to do anything useful with it.It's great that most modders and some artists like to share their work for free with the rest of the world, but the rest of us aren't entitled to any of it.
The difference is that you only pay for an artist's picture once.
You only have to pay for this mod once.
An artist isn’t going to continue making modifications to a painting once you’ve bought it, not unless you pay them to do so. Presuming they aren’t feeling generous with their time.
Honestly, 90% of programming work now is "I got X library to work inside of Y new system in Z engine". It makes sense too - it's exceedingly rare that it makes sense to reinvent someone else's wheel - and at times, not insignificant to implement the right hooks.
Things don't need to be novel and amazing to be marketable. And if it's that trivial, rather than pirating it people would just rewrite it. The fact that they're stealing it means it has value.
The fact that they're stealing it means it's priced above its perceived value though.
So it has perceived value...
But that guy above was saying that it's worthless and trivial to implement...
You can't have it both ways.
That's not true at all. People often steal because they value the item but cannot afford the price.
Strange how they felt the need to pirate his non-work instead of just doing it themselves?
Do you copy and paste comments from reddit? I read this exact comment last night I am SURE of it
So NVidia's DLLs for DLSS are not included? (Honest question, I don't even own the game.)
No, they are not included. The mod I use to enable it linked to a site that archives all the different DLSS DLL file versions. Honestly though, I couldn't tell a difference between FSR2 and DLSS 3.5 in graphical fidelity nor performance (I have a 5950x and RX 3090).
In case anyone's curious about the performance with those specs: I average around 60fps at 1440p with everything maxed out when I'm in the major city, New Atlantis (haven't gotten to another huge hub yet). In smaller areas/indoors/in space, I get around 100fps.
Are you sure the mod you're using is injecting DLSS3? Using the DLSS 3.5 DLL is not related to that. If it's only injecting DLSS2, it would be entirely expected to see negligible performance difference vs. FSR2.
Not related to what? Does DLSS 3.5 not do everything DLSS 2 does and more?
"DLSS2" and "DLSS3" are not references to the version of the DLL. They are references to different output modes of the DLL, which is also backwards compatible, i.e. the 3.5 DLL can output either mode. The Starfiels mods that were available immediately at launch do not use DLSS3, or by extension frame generation. It doesn't matter which DLL version you use
Well that's what I'm saying. My 3090 can use 3.5 but it can't do the frame generation feature that 3.5 is capable of, therefore the performance gain is negligible over FSR2. The mod I used did support DLSS 3 + frame gen.
Sure it can, I've got no problems using frame generation on my 3060. Any RTX card can do it
You can get the DLL very easily and legally, NVidia doesn't lock their DLLs.
But I asked if the mod bundles it.
That was already answered by the other commenter, I was supplying additional information
I don’t know in this particular case, but the mods I have seen require you to provide the Nvidia DLL yourself.
If it's not anything special, someone else could just "easily" reproduce it instead of having to pirate it?
They have, literally just a few hours slower than this guy charging people: https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/761
Can you link where it says you can't redistribute DLSS? The Dev guide states pretty clearly it's free to use with Nvidia gpus.
https://developer.nvidia.com/downloads/nvidia-rtx-sdks-license-23jan2023pdf#:~:text=Further%2C%20the%20DLSS%20SDK%20and,DLSS%20SDK%20and%20NGX%20SDK.
They are not distributing components of the dll. They are creating a modification of a Bethesda game which has allowed modding at the discretion of Bethesda.
The Nvidia dll is being redistributed without modification for an Nvidia GPU as exactly described.
Do you think every single game publisher negotiated a deal or paid money to ensure DLSS in their game? Can you point out any documentation outside of the direct reference to the SDK license that I linked that is in direct opposition to what your are saying? Can you point to me any discussion what so ever about paying to implement DLSS?